From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 18:06:22 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/3] package/uclibc: number patches for 0.9.32.1 In-Reply-To: <1375275819-29308-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> References: <1375275819-29308-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <20130731180622.44197b0a@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 10:03:37 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Zacarias > --- > ...atch => uclibc-0001-Fix-e500-__fe_nomask_env-use-of-__set_errno.patch} | 0 > ...ch => uclibc-0002-Fix-__libc_epoll_pwait-compile-failure-on-x86.patch} | 0 > ...> uclibc-0003-libc-sysdeps-add-__kernel_long-and-__kernel_ulong.patch} | 0 > .../{uclibc-sparc-errno-fix.patch => uclibc-0004-sparc-errno-fix.patch} | 0 > .../uclibc/0.9.32.1/{uclibc-unshare.patch => uclibc-0005-unshare.patch} | 0 > ...uxthreads-errno-fix.patch => uclibc-0006-linuxthreads-errno-fix.patch} | 0 > 6 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) Commit all three patches. Two things to notice: * Patchwork didn't detect PATCH 1/3, probably because it only consisted of git rename, and the patch itself was empty. * We normally don't accept feature patches in Buildroot. However, uClibc is really a core component, and their release cycle is slow (too say the least), so when a feature is upstream, it sometimes makes sense to backport it. But this should be the exception rather than the rule. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com